Ok, I played it all the way through, continuing my "Perfect Paragon" from ME1 > ME2 and now ME3. The overall game was great, but the ending is a different story...

...no, I'm not going to spoil it for you. But I'll say that it seems that the really "good" endings are entirely out of reach unless you play multiplayer. Needless to say, I'm rather displeased by that fact.

Bioware's said (claimed?) repeatedly there is no ending difference. You "just" need to get X amount of assets during the SP game to get the "best" ending, if you chose to ignore MP altogether. Now they they aren't more specific about the 'X' assets you need, I don't know, I'm still trying to ferret that out at their forums.

I won't argue the merits of linking SP to co-op or back (I agree they should just keep them separate, as I don't see that it's doing anything but upsetting players -- so I understand if it's just the basic principle of linking the modes in some way that bothers people), but if anyone is just refusing to even try the co-op for some reason, try it. It's great fun, even with just 2 players. And you'll get the 100% galaxy whatever if you play for a few hours each day over a weekend.

If you're worried about jerks, I think anyone we've listed in the co-op MP thread I started on this would be happy to play with you, and you'll have a good time. If you don't like listening to headset chatter, go into options and mute all microphones. If you're worried about lag, I wouldn't be; the co-op game is shockingly fast on even medicore systems (i.e., mine ) and reliable in my experience and most others I've chatted with. In the end you paid your $60 or whatever for a game that has (imho) a wonderful 3rd person, cover-fire, crazy-powers and upgrades, co-op MP experience. Don't waste it.

Certainly I'm coming at the game as someone with little ME experience (just a little on ME1 and declined to get ME2), so you can shush me off as the ME Noob. But the co-op experience is more to my fun-factor tastes for now. fwiw, if they said I had to complete the SP campaign to do this or that in co-op, I'd be annoyed as well.

They did actually include a 2 days gold pass in the Xbox version so perhaps thats enough?

I honestly wasn't looking forward to the MP either, I usually don't play the multiplayer portion of any action based game, but ME3 is different. I have yet to get a group of kids yelling out obscenities, and for the most part the players seem to try to work together. The maps are tight, the action is constant, and they don't take all that much time, about 20 minutes to complete, and if you fail a multiplayer mission it can be much less. (This is on the PC version, I imagine the 360 or PS3 versions might have a higher ratio of brats playing, not sure though).

In other words try giving it a shot, you might like it.

Logged

" And they are a strong and frightening force, impervious to, and immunized against, the feeble lance of mere reason." Isaac Asimov

Bioware's said (claimed?) repeatedly there is no ending difference. You "just" need to get X amount of assets during the SP game to get the "best" ending, if you chose to ignore MP altogether. Now they they aren't more specific about the 'X' assets you need, I don't know, I'm still trying to ferret that out at their forums.

I won't argue the merits of linking SP to co-op or back (I agree they should just keep them separate, as I don't see that it's doing anything but upsetting players -- so I understand if it's just the basic principle of linking the modes in some way that bothers people), but if anyone is just refusing to even try the co-op for some reason, try it. It's great fun, even with just 2 players. And you'll get the 100% galaxy whatever if you play for a few hours each day over a weekend.

If you're worried about jerks, I think anyone we've listed in the co-op MP thread I started on this would be happy to play with you, and you'll have a good time. If you don't like listening to headset chatter, go into options and mute all microphones. If you're worried about lag, I wouldn't be; the co-op game is shockingly fast on even medicore systems (i.e., mine ) and reliable in my experience and most others I've chatted with. In the end you paid your $60 or whatever for a game that has (imho) a wonderful 3rd person, cover-fire, crazy-powers and upgrades, co-op MP experience. Don't waste it.

Certainly I'm coming at the game as someone with little ME experience (just a little on ME1 and declined to get ME2), so you can shush me off as the ME Noob. But the co-op experience is more to my fun-factor tastes for now. fwiw, if they said I had to complete the SP campaign to do this or that in co-op, I'd be annoyed as well.

In this case, Bioware is full of shit if my experience is accurate. There's two ratings - readiness and military strength. The total rating is simply multiplying the readiness by the military strength. There is *nothing* you can do in the single player game to increase readiness. Nada. Zip. Zilch. So while I had a maxed out military strength bar, but didn't get some of the better endings simply because I didn't have enough total rating to get those choices. Therefore, in my view, the only way you can get a "great" ending is to play multiplayer. That's just flat out wrong.

I'm not "worried" about playing co-op, I just don't want to do so. And I shouldn't have to just to get a better ending in a single player game.

Bioware's said (claimed?) repeatedly there is no ending difference. You "just" need to get X amount of assets during the SP game to get the "best" ending, if you chose to ignore MP altogether. Now they they aren't more specific about the 'X' assets you need, I don't know, I'm still trying to ferret that out at their forums.

I was going to talk about this in my next impressions post but, since it's the topic du jour, I'll break it out and put it here instead:

I played enough of the single player campaign over the weekend to reach the beginning of the "take Earth back" section of the game, so I should essentially be done gathering war assets. I've had one of those nice thinly-veiled "this will be your last chance to do stuff; are you sure you wish to proceed?" conversations. So at this point, I know the following:

1) It takes an effective military strength (war assets * your MP-based readiness modifier) of 2800 to "fill" the bar on the in-game War Terminal. This is easy. I exceeded that before I added two entire races to my alliance. I'm playing on Normal; I don't know if that number is higher on Hardcore or Insane.

2) I actually ended up with around 5800 War Assets and a 67% modifier, for an effective strength of 3900. So even if I hadn't played some MP, 5800 * 50% = 2900, or still completely filling that bar. And this is on a play-through with a ME1 decision to save the Council, which reduces the strength of the Alliance fleet significantly. And I also missed a bunch of scanning-type objectives in the first third of the game, due to a plot-progression lockout, as I mentioned a few days ago.

3) So based on all the information presented in the game, I would say it is indeed quite easy to reach full readiness, with pretty much a comparable amount of effort between scanning-for-Normandy-upgrades in ME2 and scanning-for-War-Assets in ME3. For reference, you can also occasionally ask Admiral Hackett how you're doing and the last time I did so, he told me "we're as ready as we can be; you've done well, Shepard".

4) Now, here's the rub: I've seen people on other forums (most notably QT3) saying that filling your readiness bar does *not* equate to getting the best ending -- that, in fact, there are "off the charts" thresholds of getting a better ending at 4000 and the "best" ending at 5000. I have yet to see a link to any official substantiation of this, however, and I think there's also still a lot of confusion between the two pre- and post-MP adjustment counting of war assets.

5) IF the above is true - and, again, I've not seen anyone in authority say it is - then it is absolutely HORRIBLE design to completely obscure that information in the game. I will also say that, without MP, I have very little idea HOW you would get to an effective 5,000 war assets (i.e., 10,000 multiplied by 0.5 for never playing MP). I'm pretty sure I've made all the optimal choices within ME3 to maximize my strength, as tough as some of those choices were. Yes, the Alliance fleet is reduced by a third in my game, but it's only around 1200 strength right now, so that's only about 400 more if I hadn't saved the Council in ME3 (and minus something for the fact that I'm getting credit for the Destiny Ascension right now). And the scanning objectives aren't that valuable -- unless I missed a lot more than I realized, I can't see how they would be worth more than another 500, maybe another 1000 at most. So, yes, I'm guessing and spitballing here, but I don't think getting higher than somewhere in the 7000s, reduced to 3500-4000, is possible without playing MP.

So, my assessment at this point (and, again, I still haven't completed the game, so it's still possible something could change...): it's easy to achieve everything the game tells you there is to achieve by playing SP only; it's impossible to achieve everything people-on-the-internet-who-don't-work-for-Bioware say you need to achieve in order to get the "ideal" ending.

So many this and that's about this game that in my eyes tarnishes the trilogy. Why they added multiplayer or co-op is something they could never explain adequatley to me. What was wrong with the way things were flowing from the other two games? I will admit I'm frustrated by the inability of being able to play my ME2 save games. But in my opinion ME3 ends the series with a whimper not a bang.

Amazing how a gaming company can go from Blizzard like status to people questioning BW's previous excellence in their classic games. Between this and SW:ToR, Bioware are just another gaming company to me now. And I'm Canadian...

So if I'm going to play the game how they want me to play it, so I can get the best ending, I should get as far as I can in the SP, and then cram MP co-op (since readiness level decays), and then finish the SP? I like playing MP co-op, but I don't agree with tying it to SP story success. The two game modes should be distinct and seperate, or at least not required together to get the best story ending. If this is all true, and that a pure maxed out SP experience can only net an ok story ending, that stinks.

Actually, the side missions are starting to get somewhat predictable, once it became apparent that the point of them was to tie up the storylines for any companions from ME2 that (a) aren't dead and (b) don't already figure in the main missions somehow. I've started trying to guess who I'm going to run into based on the mission description and intro cutscenes -- i.e., did someone say Ardat-Yakshi? Oh, hi Samara. I guess the faint tinge of disappointment I'm getting from these is because it's so easy to see behind the curtain and tell that these missions were written backwards: instead of being necessary parts of the war story into which your old friends naturally fit, these stories have been created specifically to justify the inclusion of your old friends, with loose connections to the war tossed in so that they don't feel totally out of place.

I like the side missions with cameo appearances from the ME2 cast, especially now that I'm also playing a character with no ME2 save import on the PC. My ME2 import is on the 360, where I'm playing an imported character through the story. It's been cool running into old buddies from ME2, even the smaller cameos that show up as war asset resources. Most of these you only get if you have a save import from ME2. I'm also playing on the PC, with no ME2 save import, and most of those side missions use a generic stand-in where the ME2 npc cameo would have been. It's really kind of bummer.

This isn't too spoilery, just names and cameo appearances from ME2 that aren't there if you play without a save import, but I'll hide it just to be safe. Early in my no ME2 save import game, these are the npcs that don't make it into the side missions:

Spoiler for Hiden:

Wrex doesn't survive the Vermire stand-off. Which sucks, because Wrex is awesome, and his stand-in (Wreav) is a complete tool (at least at this point in the game). Grunt was apparently never recruited by Shephard. Again, I used both Wrex and Grunt a ton in ME1 and ME2, so it was dissapointing to see another stand-in.Jack was never recruited or saved by Shephard, so in that side mission, Jack doesn't exist. It's just the students. And it doesn't turn out as well as when Jack is there.

TLDR: Playing ME3 with the ME2 save import has been a better experience for me because of the NPC cameos, even if they are predictable.

Very disappointed by the endings. Not what the ME games were building up to.

I absolutely hate games that have meaningless and arbitrary choices at the end that invalidate everything else done in the game. Oh and the usual arbitrary and cliche heroic sacrifice, despite the technology represented in the game being more than capable.

Not to mention an ending, character, and plot elements that were never built up or hinted at.

It's like they couldn't write themselves out of the Reaper sized hole and just rubbed crap against the wall until something looked half-decent.

I think I'm going to end up playing my Renegade FemShep right after I finish instead of waiting, which is more than I could say for ME2 where it took me almost 2 years to go back for the second playthrough.

of course I haven't finished yet, so that could change.

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

I just noticed in the 'more info' section of the War Room console it says I have even chances of winning with the bar filled up; I'll have to keep an eye on it to see if that changes again when I hit 4000 EMS.

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

Finished the game. Also did a little reading, YouTubing and watching-of-videos-in-the-game-directory (hooray for the ubiquitousness of the BIK video format) to get a feel for the other ways the end can play out. Full thoughts in the next day or two, once I've gotten a little perspective.

That said, the ending is literally STUPID. It's not that it's necessarily a horrible way for the series to end -- I haven't really made up my mind about that yet -- but it's completely inappropriate to the game that came before it. Details (brief, I promise, but still very spoilerific) in spoilers:

Spoiler for Hiden:

So the ultimate explanation for the cycle of extinction is that this being, whatever it represents, believes that all organic life ultimately creates synthetic life, that synthetic life inevitably rebels against its creators and the resulting conflict would be so horrific that using the Reapers to "clear the deck" of advanced organic life just before this armageddon occurs in each cycle is justified.

Now, to be fair, this theme doesn't come out of nowhere. ME1 and ME2 both dealt significantly with dangers of artificial intelligence: the VI on Luna, the AI behind the Presidium Emporium, the question of using even a shackled EDI (then even more so the unshackled one) and, of course, the Quarian-Geth conflict (which would seem to be the ultimate proof positive of this concept).

Except: the first 98% of ME3 turns this on its head. EDI, now completely unshackled and supposedly incredibly dangerous, demonstrates herself to be completely loyal and devoted to Shepard (and possibly more importantly Joker's) cause. She doesn't betray you to Cerberus, her creator, or the Geth, her kin. Shepard's conversations can even guide her to, in Shepard's words, discovering a little humanity. Likewise, the Quarian-Geth conflict has backstory added that shows the Geth capable of compassion / mercy (they allowed the original Quarians to flee Rannoch, rather than annihilating them) and it is possible to resolve that plot with both races returning to Rannoch and beginning to live in harmony again.

Up to this point, we have a pretty great story: the first two games establish a galaxy full of fear and suspicion for AIs -- but then two powerful examples in ME3 demonstrate how myopic this belief is and introduce the possibility of a conclusion where artificial life (possibly even including the Reapers?) can be redeemed. And then the ending completely ignores BOTH of these plots from ME3, forces you to make a decision based on the now-demonstrably-false assumption that organic and synthetic life are incompatible and doesn't even give you the chance to argue your experiences to the being that was behind it all. Where were the "You're wrong! I just fought my way to you with an AI at my side!" or "Look at Rannoch, where centuries of bitter hatred have been replaced by co-existence and co-operation!" dialogues? Where was the ending that allowed you to pacify / talk down / reprogram the Reapers and lead the two forms of life, while still separate, to exist symbiotically?

I'm not saying you should have to take that ending. A "you annihilated half the galaxy, you must BURN" ending still makes a lot of sense as well. But to not even present the option, to not even acknowledge the possibility, to in fact force you to choose from three outcomes that are all based on the diametrically opposite premise is an incomprehensible travesty. Whoever wrote that final scene simply didn't. Play. The. Game.

Anyway, that's enough ranting for tonight. Like I said, more general thoughts about the game tomorrow or Wednesay, time permitting.

So many this and that's about this game that in my eyes tarnishes the trilogy. Why they added multiplayer or co-op is something they could never explain adequatley to me.

It's fun as hell, and plenty of us are starved for a 3rd person co-op shooter that's a blast to play, is shockingly forgiving with modest PCs and connections, and holds up well under repeated sessions due to the incredible variety in weapons, powers and enemies. Isn't that a good enough reason?

If it's "they wasted too much time on MP that should've been spent on a better ending," I doubt the writers worked on the co-op much. Some sort of more story-based campaign co-op would be fun, yet it probably wouldn't offer as easy a "pick up and play" enjoyment factor. There again though, if they introduced "story" into the co-op, players would again raise the pitchforks and torches and declare "don't sneak story into co-op to force me to actually play the multiplayer game." So perhaps it's best to just keep co-op Generic.

Or you could just look at it as clever marketing. I had no interest in ME3 (really), until I played the co-op demo a few times. That hooked me, convinced me to get the game. I've played the SP enough to know I like it too, but it's the co-op I keep logging into every night. Who would've thought my dream co-op 3rd person shooter would come from... Bioware? Talk about left field.

However, I wholly agree the two modes don't need and shouldn't be tied together. I'd gladly sign a petition to that effect for all the good it would do.

I think maybe better might've been to have had Galaxy at War be some sort of co-op only thing that determined character bonuses or even just cosmetic perks strictly within co-op. Actually, the map reminds me of Planetside. While I've got no interest in a PvP-type ME multiplayer game, some more clever use of the Galaxy at War maps to encourage you to play on different maps and stuff in co-op, that might've been fun. Some sort of overreaching co-op strategy meta game over top of the blasting.

I think Luis CK would be happy with Mass Effect 3's use of the expression, "bag of dicks". I had to do a mental rewind when I heard it...even waiting until the text popped up so I could confirm with my eyes. Yep, how about that, she just called Shepard a bag of dicks. I've felt at times that Shepard can be a bag of dicks too, so I considered the comment both accurate and complimentary.

Most interestingly, the Mass Effect 3 Datapad app can interact directly with the console game. After meeting certain characters in Mass Effect 3, you will receive messages in the iOS Datapad app. Nothing integral to the enjoyment of the console game, but rather additional fan service for those that want to explore even further. Also, you can deploy ships in the app's Fleet Commander which can increase your chances of success against Reapers in the console game.

grabbing it now, hopefully it affects PC's too and not just consoles.

[edit] yep, it says PC in app.

[edit 2] OK, so you deploy stuff and it can take some time for missions to complete, it looks like it is mainly going to be a way to offset the Galactic Readiness decay.

« Last Edit: March 13, 2012, 08:04:56 PM by CeeKay »

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

holy sh!t, you can shoot down the rockets from Geth Rocket troopers? I've always just dodged them, but accidentally blasted one of of the air... I wonder if that means you can shoot other projectiles.....

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

I'm glad I checked this thread... I was wondering why the readiness levels weren't rising on the map...

Played one round of MP last night - it was fun! Weird thing, the readiness went up to 52% (galaxy wide, which struck me as odd... it seemed zone specific...), but then this morning when I went in to futz w/ characters, it was back down to 51%... does it creep back down if you don't play, or what?

This baffled me too, until I played some more: it's galaxy-wide if you're playing on Random maps; if the person hosting picks a specific map, however, you get a large boost to that region and a much smaller one to the others (assuming you do well).

This baffled me too, until I played some more: it's galaxy-wide if you're playing on Random maps; if the person hosting picks a specific map, however, you get a large boost to that region and a much smaller one to the others (assuming you do well).

- Ash

I was wondering about that, got a 8% bonus to a specific region a couple of time and 2-3% overall to everything else. that might make it a better deal to host specific maps.

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

some preliminary final thoughts as I think I'm entering the final stretch:

1) yeah, scanning is dumb. get the Reapers all riled up? just get caught and it will reload the autosave that is made when you enter the galaxy, so if youn trigger them just fly around, scan, getb caught and then go back to where you found the assets after the re-load.

2) it's nice that they gave more weapons and armor this time around, but it seemed unnecessary. I have used pretty much the same weapons and same armor the whole game without noticing a need to switch things up.

3) re: Mass Effect 2 companions:

Spoiler for Hiden:

they really liked killing them off.

4) companions in general: it's nice that they kept the pool of them small, but in a ways it would have been cool to have the whole band back together on the ship to see what kinds of inter-play they'd have.

5) thank you for the aquarium VI! I probably killed more fish in ME2 than Collectors from forgetting to feed them.

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

on the plus side I imagine we'll see some save game editors out soon that will let you raise your assets in SP high enough that even the MP multiplier won't stop you from getting the best ending.

Getting the 'best' ending (which adds about 5 seconds into the ending footage) is ABSOLUTELY AND TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE without playing MP. PERIOD.

Bioware outright lied when they said that. There's just NOT enough things to find, collect, whatever to get it up to the required levels without going into Multiplayer.

yikes. w/o MP I'd maybe his the second to last tier, and I've been doing the Paragon route. I think in the Renegade style I might be totally screwed.

[edit] oh, and one more thing from my list above:

6) for the love of god fix the Normandy cockpit! I got stuck there more times than I can remember, and that was just from talking to Joker or Edi. important rule to live by: save before going there to talk.

« Last Edit: March 14, 2012, 07:25:36 AM by CeeKay »

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

This baffled me too, until I played some more: it's galaxy-wide if you're playing on Random maps; if the person hosting picks a specific map, however, you get a large boost to that region and a much smaller one to the others (assuming you do well).

- Ash

I was wondering about that, got a 8% bonus to a specific region a couple of time and 2-3% overall to everything else. that might make it a better deal to host specific maps.

Last night I played... 3 rounds? 4 rounds? I can't remember... anyway, I got stuff up to 63%. I was always the lowest scoring person on my team, but also the lowest level, so maybe it's just that I haven't unlocked better stuff so far. I just got an assault rifle I like better.

Weirdness: I thought I was saying 'join a specific region map', but I always got the same boost to all regions (successfully completed each round), so I guess it was random... but... I got the same map (reactor) every single time... which got really old. Am I missing something and I actually DID tell it to just play that map? It's hazy after sleeping, but I think I might have even tried selecting a different location and still got the same map on the last round... but maybe not.

When you get readiness to 100%, does it continue to deteriorate at 1%/day, or does it hold there? It seems like you have to coordinate playing a bunch of regular MP with also finishing the SP at the same time. While both parts of the game are fun, I absolutely loathe the idea of MP affecting the plot of the SP game, and if it has to, that it deteriorates. I don't mind stuff like 'play co-op to unlock this gun', but this is ridiculous - forcing people to MP.

It decays at about 1% per day, so unless you are planning on taking a month to finish, you're fine. 6000 effective strength seems to be the top you can possibly need, but you can get just as good endings at over 5000.

Has anyone seen the actual numbers for the effective military strength that is needed to get the different endings? I'm reluctant to go wandering into a google search for fear of reading major story spoilers. It sounds like Bioware will need to patch in more things to collect and do, or raise the war asset rewards so a SP playthrough can get all the endings, especially for people that buy the game after the MP rush wears off.

Has anyone seen the actual numbers for the effective military strength that is needed to get the different endings?

Destructor has the various thresholds in a spoiler tag just a few posts up this thread. He doesn't really say what the different tiers affect, though, so I'll be a little more spoilerific here:

Spoiler for Hiden:

All thresholds up to 2800: determine how much damage Earth sustains as a result of the Reaper attack.At 2800 (i.e., when your progress bar on the War Terminal is full): you unlock a third final choice that is presumably meant to be the most appealing.At 4000: it becomes possible to save someone's life just before the final choice.At 5000: a particular final choice unlocks a five-second cut-scene "easter egg" after the credits regarding Shepard's own fate.

Has anyone seen the actual numbers for the effective military strength that is needed to get the different endings?

Destructor has the various thresholds in a spoiler tag just a few posts up this thread. He doesn't really say what the different tiers affect, though, so I'll be a little more spoilerific here:

Spoiler for Hiden:

All thresholds up to 2800: determine how much damage Earth sustains as a result of the Reaper attack.At 2800 (i.e., when your progress bar on the War Terminal is full): you unlock a third final choice that is presumably meant to be the most appealing.At 4000: it becomes possible to save someone's life just before the final choice.At 5000: a particular final choice unlocks a five-second cut-scene "easter egg" after the credits regarding Shepard's own fate.

Hope that helps.

- Ash

Thanks Ash. Exactly what I was hoping to see. I think I'll aim for the middle option (4k).

Thanks Ash. Exactly what I was hoping to see. I think I'll aim for the middle option (4k).

To be clear, I think what exactly happens also depends on some of your conversation choices, reputation scores, etc. -- and some elements are also apparently affected by earlier decisions like whether you kept or destroyed the Collector base -- but that's the general gist.

It decays at about 1% per day, so unless you are planning on taking a month to finish, you're fine. 6000 effective strength seems to be the top you can possibly need, but you can get just as good endings at over 5000.

when I went to bed at 5am this morning I was at 100%, less than 12 hours later I'm at 98%.

Logged

Because I can,also because I don't care what you want.XBL: OriginalCeeKayWii U: CeeKay

It decays at about 1% per day, so unless you are planning on taking a month to finish, you're fine. 6000 effective strength seems to be the top you can possibly need, but you can get just as good endings at over 5000.

when I went to bed at 5am this morning I was at 100%, less than 12 hours later I'm at 98%.